|
I may need to go back and look this up, but....
Didn't Clinton propose a 90% reduction in emmissions by 2008?
An didn't Bush scale that back to somewhere in the range of 50-75% by 2008?
How is this BAD? Is this not better than what was being put out by these plants in the past?
This debate always gets turned around to sound like the current administration has INCREASED pollution. Of course they haven't. What they did was get a law passed that reduces pollution.
Are the rivers and oceans cleaner than they were in the 50s, 60, 70, 80s and 90s? I think so, and the new 2008 restrictions will make them even cleaner in the future.
FWIW the mercury contamination comes mostly from the coal fired plant. I am for closing them in exchange for a clean burning fuel.
|
Threaded Mode